PAWAN SINGH KANWAR Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition (s) under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the impugned order dtd. 30/5/2017 (Annexure P/1) passed by the respondent No.2 whereby the private respondent No.8 who is junior to the petitioner has been promoted on the post of Lecturer whereas the petitioner has been promoted on the post of Lecturer vide order dtd. 29/9/2018 which is illegal and contrary to the rules.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Assistant Teacher by order dtd. 27/12/1986 and thereafter he was promoted on the post of Upper Division Teacher by order dtd. 7/10/2008. He would further submit that the private respondent No.8 was initially appointed on the post of Assistant Teacher by order dtd. 9/1/1991 and thereafter the petitioner was promoted on the post of Upper Division Teacher by order dtd. 13/10/2008 as per seniority list dtd. 1/4/2014 showing the petitioner's name at Serial No.882 whereas the respondent No.8 is showing at serial No. 1728. Thereafter suddenly respondent No.2 has passed the impugned order dtd. 30/5/2017 in which the private respondent No.8 has got promotion on the post of Lecturer by ignoring and depriving the name of the petitioner for promotion which is illegal.

(3.) This petition has been filed after lapse of eight years from the date of promotion of respondent No.8 ie., on 30/5/2017. As such, this petition is hopelessly barred by limitation. Therefore, I am of the view that at this juncture, the petition is not maintainable, the same is liable to be dismissed in view of well settled position of law that the petitioner for claiming promotion should approach the Court expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months whereas the present petition has been filed after lapse of more than eight years. Therefore, I am of the view of that this writ petition deserves to be dismissed and accordingly it is dismissed.